In human chemistry, a continuing bond is an attachment or bond to a deceased individual that is maintained rather than relinquished. [1]
The term was introduced in the 1996 book Continuing Bonds, a presentation of study results from several populations, presented by twenty-two authors. [2] In this book, edited by psychologists Dennis Klass, Phyllis Silverman, and Steven Nickman, findings showed that in actual practice people tend to maintain very real connections to the deceased, a view contrary to the standard dogma, supposedly promoted by Freudian psychologists, that it was healthier to completely break-off bonds from the deceased. The term ‘continuing bonds’ has since become something of a vogue theoretical concept in the psychology bereavement community, with yearly publications on the subject.
Cessation bonds
The general logic of continuity bonds, in theme, seems to be similar to American chemical engineer Libb Thims’ 2005 cessation conservation hypothesis, in which residual ‘energy signature’ of formerly active human chemical bonds remains following the termination of an individual.
American psychologist Stephen Kosslyn, in his 2006 section on what he believes but can’t prove, outlines a fairly decent model of what he calls “social prosthetic systems”, wherein people rely on others to extend one’s reasoning ability and emotional regulation, particularly in areas where one is deficient. Kosslyn posits, in what seems to be an aspect of a dihumanide molecule description, that a “good marriage” arises when two pairs act as effective social prosthetics for each other. In regards to death, Kosslyn posits that: [3]
“One might argue that when your body dies, part of your mind may survive.”
Technically, to correct Kosslyn, a molecule cannot die, but the latter part of his supposition may have some sense to it.
References
1. Worden, J. William. (2008). Grief Counseling and Grief Therapy: a Handbook for the Mental Health Practitioner (continuing bonds, pgs. 3-4, etc.). Springer.
2. Klass, D., Silverman, Phyllis R., and Nickman, S.L. (1996). Continuing Bonds: New Understandings of Grief. Taylor & Francis.
3. Kosslyn, Stephen. (2006). “I believe that a person’s mind arises not only from one’s own brain, but in part from the brains of other people”, in: What We Believe, But Can’t Prove (pgs. 152-53). Harper-Perennial.
Further reading
● Wallis, J. (2001). “Continuing Bonds: Relationship Between the Living and the Dead within Contemporary Spiritualism.” Morality, 6: 127-45.
● Field, N. P., Gal-Oz, e., and Bonanno, G.A. (2003). “Continuing Bonds and Adjustment at 5 Years after Death of a Spouse.” Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 71: 110-17.
● Field, N. P., Gao, B. I., and Paderna, L. (2005). “Continuing Bonds in Bereavement: an Attachment Theory Based Perspective”, Death Studies, 29: 277-99.
● Valentine, Christine. (2008). Bereavement Narratives: Continuing Bonds in the Twenty-first Century. Taylor & Francis.
External links
● Continuing bonds – Encyclopedia of Death and Dying.
